just a short-term plan as to how to deal with the appropriations process, i'm an appropriator. i think i know that that's not the root of the problem. unlike any other speaker we have had, he's had the courage to talk about a long-term plan and to get at the real drivers of debt. we all know what they are. we all know it's social security, we all know it's medicare and medicaid. no president of either side has been willing to deal with this. no speaker has been willing to deal with this. my friend, our former colleague delay knee and i i offered a plan to go back and do 1983 what we did then and address social security. we never can get any help. this is a guy that wants to

create a debt commission, a bipartisan debt commission and get at the roots of our spending problem. that takes courage. and republicans ought to support somebody with that kind of courage. now he's not only focused on one thing. i don't know anybody that's done more to highlight and talk about the border disaster that's underway right now as we speak. i had the privilege of serving here when jay johnson was secretary of homeland security. i have a very high opinion of jay johnson. i think he's wasn't of the finest public servants i have ever met. he was asked define what was a crisis on the southern border. any time you have more than a thousand illegal entries a day, you have a crisis. we have 10 or 11 times that every single day. and in that tide of humanity that's coming across, there's a

boat load of fentanyl coming to kill tens of thousands of all of our constituents. there are human traffickers who are take ing advantage of young men and young women and frankly predators in our own country and they are bringing them across. not by the tens or the 20s or the dozens, but i by the hundreds and the thousands. there are amongst that flow of people, people that wish us will. people who are not fleeing from oppression, people who are terrorists or criminals that are coming into our country for no good reason. now that is not an immigration problem, that's a border security problem. they are not the same thing. we can debate immigration. that's a worthy debate. we should never have to debate border security.

nobody has highlighted that issue like my friend jim jordan. nobody has done more as a committee chairman to move legislation that would meaningfully deal with this problem. and this, my friends, on both sides of the aisle, but with all due respect particularly this administration, need to look at this. you need to look at this had seriously. don't confuse it with immigration. we aren't going to have immigration reform until we have border security. this has been the number one champion of that. finally, i want to talk about something that can bring us together. there are a lot of things we disagree on. most of us do not disagree about the security of the state of israel. all of us, on both sides of the ailes, reacted with horror and

with deep sympathy and with legitimate outrage at the crime that was perpetrated against the people of israel in the last week. all of us. all of us know that they are within their rights to respond forcefully swiftly to defend their people and punish those who brought that upon them. [ applause ] so in a moment of crisis, and we are in a moment of crisis, we should come together and act. we know we can't do that without the spr the house. now it's a narrow majority, but

my friends and are in the majority. we need to produce a speaker. we have a candidate who we know where he will stand on issues important. we know where he's going to stand on spending because it's where he's always stood. it's not like he's changed over the course of his career. i know what he's going to do on the border. i have seen what his committee produced. it's not just money. it's policy and change to provide security for the american people. and finally, and i say this on a bipartisan basis, i know he will stand up for israel, and i know in that area, we can come together. that crisis is on us now. we may get a request almost any time to act. we need to be able to act. my friend will act on that crisis. he's shown it his whole career. it's with a great deal of pride that i have the privilege of nominating my friend, our chairman to the judiciary

committee, but a person whose principles you know, whose actions you can trust, and who in a time of crisis will respond with the leadership we need. jim jordan. [ applause ] >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. aguilar. >> mr. speaker, i rise today at the direction of the house democratic caucus to place into nomination for the position of speaker of the house of representatives the honorable hah keep jeffries of new york. here we are again, mr. speaker.

i promise to make these speeches shorter if we get closer to ament compromise, but i'm not certain that that's going to happen at this moment. while the republican candidate for speak er is making late-nigt bathroom deals to secure the gavel, leader jeffries has once again extended the hand of bipartisanship for a path forward. one thing was very clear yesterday. the vote total. 220, 212 to 200. leader jeffries has the support to be speaker that this country needs. mr. speaker, 212-200, no amount

of election denying is going to take away from those vote totals. we shouldn't be surprised at the vote count. i noted yesterday the legislative acumen of the gentleman from ohio. would it surprise anyone that in addition to not passing a single piece of legislation, he's never put a put a piece of legislation that's made it to a committee. the speaker of the house must be a legislator. the gentleman from ohio falls short in that regard. he supports an extreme agenda and is hell bent on banning abortion nationwide. gutting medicare, gutting social security, and giving cover to january 6th attackers. those aren't the values that we share. if we don't see a speaker

elected in this round, there's going to be another candidate and another internal republican conference vote and a secret ballot and the country can't afford more delays and more chaos. 15 days should be enough. house democrats are united on this path forward. we're united behind hakeem jeffries, united to put people over politics, united to lower costs, create better-paying jobs, build safer communities, and defend democracy. once again, we're coming together to achieve this common goal and that is to make hakeem jeffries speaker of the house of representatives. almost, mr. speaker pro tem.

hakeem jeffries has done what we haven't seen from the other side of the ailes, and that is to keep a caucus united. when extreme maga republicans vowed to send our country into a devastating default, it was leader jeffries who led house democrats to reject the extremism and keep the government open. we have the vote totals to back that up. it has been leader jeffreys and house democrat who is have shown a willingness and conviction to keep our promise to deliver for american families. it will be hakeem jeffries who will move our body and our country forward on a bipartisan path. who on the other side of the aisle will take yes for an answer and work with us to achieve three common goals. my colleague and good friend from oklahoma mentioned one of

them. supporting assistance to israel, but what he left out was assistance to ukraine and our national security objectives . second, above all else, we must commit to keep this government open and functioning. and finally, we need to put this body on a bipartisan path to achieve real results for the american public. that is what we were set to do. that's what we need to do. that's why hakeem jeffries is the leader we need at this time to lead this chamber. i'd like to nominate hakeem jeffries as speaker of the

house. i yield back . >> no further nominations, the clerk will now call the role. >> adams? >> jeffries? >> jordan. >> aguilar. >> jeffries. alford, jordan. allen? >> jordan. >> allred? >> jeffries. >> amaday?

>> jordan. >> armstrong? >> jordan. >> arrington? >> jordan. >> auchincloss? >> jeffries. >> babbin? >> jordan. >> bacon? >> mccarthy. >> with that vote from house republican don bacon in favor of kevin mccarthy, which is essentially a no vote for jim jordan, we start to take note of the votes against jim jordan. remember, he can only afford three house republicans voting against him. we have a few in the b's that we're going to keep an eye on. the next one that we're going to keep an is buchanan of florida. he voted for jordan yesterday,

but he might flip and peel away. also ken buck of colorado. those are the ones we're keeping an eye on in the b's. we anticipate that congressman jordan will not be able to get the 217 votes he needs today. is it 217? >> 217. he can only afford to lose three because one democrat is missing. >> he can't lose more than three. three against him is fine. four is not. let's listen in to pay attention to is buchanan, which comes in a few votes. buchanan of florida voted for jordan yesterday, but we opportunity there are going to be a few republicans who voted for jordan yesterday in a show of spirit, but now are going to start voting against him.

he's going to start to lose votes in this second ballot. let's listen in. buchanan and buck are the next two that we're really having ourer ears peeled for. let's listen in. >> boebert? >> jordan. >> bonamici? >> jeffries. >> bosse? >> jordan. >> beauman? >> jeffries. >> boyle of pennsylvania? >> jeffries. >> brown? >> jeffries. >> brownlee? >> jeffries. >> buchanan?

>> donalds. >> buck? >> emmr. >> all right. so that is three no votes essentially for jim jordan from house republicans because we have don bacon of nebraska voting for mccarthy and we have buchanan of florida voting for donalds, his fellow floridian and buck voting for tom. that's three no votes. he lost a vote because buchanan voted for jim jordan yesterday. so again, this is as of now,

worse for him than it was yesterday. he could still pick up votes, it's possible that people who voted against him yesterday will vote for him. none of these votes are final until the comes down. people change their votes even after they have et voted no, they might change to yes. they could change to no. but as of right now, if i were jim jordan, i would be feeling worse. the next names we're going to be looking for in the c's are chavez from oregon. she voted for mccarthy yesterday. she's in a biden district. a lot of republicans in biden districts think that jordan is just a little too toxic for their voters. and then let's listen in to see what congresswoman chavez has to say.

>> cartwright? >> jeffries. >> case yb. >>? >> jeffries. >> casten? >> jeffries. >> castro of florida. >> jeffries. >> castro of texas? >> jeffrjeffries. >> chavez? >> mccarthy. >> there you have it. assuming no one will switch their votes, with that fourth vote against him has lost the speakership. he's now lost four with the caveat that people switch their votes, but as of right now, if i were jim jordan, he's doing worse than yesterday. we'll be looking next at

congressman of new york and congressman of diaz-balart. kasie hunt, once again, i'm confused why he felt the need to call the vote given did not have the 217 votes sewn up. yet in show of force, he decided he wanted to force the issue. >> i just remind myself of the confusion about what's going on in the house. i have covered it for decades, and we have never seen this before. we're just in territory that is hard to understand. it's hard to explain. the people involved don't actually know what's going on right now. and so we just have to follow along with it as they are and take it as it comes. i think the strategy that jordan

was using, people have called him a bully. they say his tactics are bullying. and making a public show is one way to do that. it's basically forcing people to put their money where their mouth is. put on the record where they are. kevin mccarthy, obviously, found this strategy to be effective for him in the end. he wore people down. mccarthy has been in jordan's camp and encouraging to go to the floor and keep going and keep going until the opposition wears down. but kevin mccarthy never phased what it looks like jordan is about to face here, which is that every time kevin mccarthy took another vote, it was the same or better than the vote before. until he only had a handful of holdouts. this is worse for jordan. so suddenly, there are conversations going on about possibly trying to empower patrick mchenry, who is viewed as something of a consensus pick, somebody that there are conversations going on among democrats about what to do to try to get the house of

representatives to a place where they can pass aid to israel, aid to ukraine, keep the government open past thanksgiving, and just do the very basic things of governance. that's part of a live conversation today. so i don't blame people for being confused. >> it's an odd maneuver by jordan to force these votes when he's potentially even less popular today than yesterday. >> he says it's his nature to be a fighter. and after one round, he probably figured he had to show he needed another round. but what we were talking about kevin mccarthy, what he had -- >> i'm sorry to interrupt. i want to listen to the d's coming up. >> desonya?

>> jeffries. >> sdel zeldon. diaz-balart? >> scalise. >> sos that's six votes from house republicans against jim jordan. this is worse for jim jordan than it did yesterday. we're going to hear from congressman jake elsie of texas in a second. and he did not vote for jordan

either yesterday. let's listen in. >> edwards? >> jordan. >> ellzey? >> mike garth see kwa. garcia. >> that's a 7th vote against jim jordan. >> what i was saying about the difference between kevin mccarthy and jordan is that mccarthy had a lot of built up good will. he spent years fundraising for people, recruiting people to run for congress, negotiating with people, putting people on committees and there was a sense of loyalty to mccarthy that wasn't strong enough the second time, but there was that sense this he could go many rounds and wear people down. with jordan, it worked in the

other direction. we have buchanan of florida, which is a flip from tuesday. and you're going to see more flips from people who feel that if he's going to lose, i'm not going to take ta political risk, particularly if you're among those more moderate republicans. yesterday he lost a half dozen of them. woolsey if he loses more today. >> let me bring in former congressman adam kinzinger. congressman, before i invite you to talk about jordan, i wonder what you think about the passionate speech you heard from congressman tom cole in which he praised congressman jordan as a man of ethics and principle. he called him had a man of integrity. is that the jim jordan you know?

>> no, it's not. it was disappointing becauses i know tom cole well. he's an institutionalist, a pretty normal guy. not sure why he took up the mantle in nominating jim jordan, because he doesn't like jim jordan unless something changed in the last year. it was disappoint ing to me, bu it was not as bad as calling jim jordan the moses of our time. so at least there wasn't that in that process. so this is an interesting day. i was remembering something that i had forgotn. when i was elected as a freshman, i was the nominator, i no nominated jim jordan for the republican study committee for that position. very quickly i resigned. it's amaze og to watch how far he's fallenen. somebody earlier was talking about his lack of good will

built up. this is a guy that's worked against everybody on the floor there at one point or the another to defeat them in a primary or make sure their bills don't get passed. so i'm pretty amazed he's only lost 20 and i'm shocked he's doing the second round. >> we're about to hear another no. >> mike garcia? >> jordan. >> jeffries. >> garcia of illinois? >> jeffries. >> fwagarcia of texas? >> jeffries. >> jimenez? >> mccar thi. >> we're going to listen in to see who who congressman gonzales votes for. >> gomez? >> jeffries.

>> tony gonzales? >> scalise. >> 11 votes against congressman jordan. he's doing worse now than he did yesterday. let me throw it to dana bash. >> as we continue to listen, he is doing worse. and what is noteworthy is when you look back at the only other time we have covered anything close to this, which is in january when kevin mccarthy did this 15 times, he didn't go down. he didn't get worse. he got better or staid the same. and that is certainly not where jim jordan is right now. so what is happening on the house floor right now, as the reality is there, jim jordan will not become speaker in this vote, it is what's next.

we had been talking about these very real conversations going on about giving patrick mchenry, the temporary speaker, more power. and as these conversations have become more and more public, i am told that the opposition, particularly from the right inside the conference, has become more loud, stronger, and i had just one text from somebody who wants this to happen eventually, who said we should be cautious because timing is everything in politics. forgive me, i'm outside the capitol. there's law enforcement going behind me. but the timing is everything in politics and the timing may not be right yet for that to happen. the reason is because the house

republicans are quite split on this because republicans, in order to give mchenry more power, in order to get the basic business of functions of the government done, they will need democratic support. and that is a very divisive notion inside the house republican conference. >> yeah. the idea that you would have the majority in the house and then have essentially a coalition government with democrats to have to run it is not something that a lot of republicans in the house or a lot of republican voters would want to have happen. but that's where the eight people who overthrew kevin mccarthy have put the republican party. a majority party in numbers, but not a majority party in function. so functionally right now because of the close nature of the house and these eight people, it's hard to argue that the republicans have a functioning majority. if you're a republican voter out

there or a donor or somebody who wants to see republicans do well, you have to be incredibly disappointed. now the larger american people may say maybe they should work together. i think it's in everyone's best interest to get a resolution of some kind. >> you say it's hard to argue that republicans don't have a functioning majority, that's just a fact. they do not have a functioning majority. full stop. it's 15 days in and there's no speaker who has the power to do really basic things like fund the government. let's listen to some of the other votes. >> jackson lee? >> jeffries.

>> jacobs? >> jeffries. >> james? >> miller mooeks . >> the house come to order. the clerk will continue. >> jooi pal? >> jeffries. >> jeffries? >> jeffries.

>> johnson of georgia? >> jeffries. >> johnson of louisiana? >> jordan. >> johnson of ohio? >> jordan. >> johnson of south dakota? >> jordan. >> jordan? >> jordan. >> joyce of ohio? >> jordan. >> joyce of pennsylvania? >> jordan.

>> kamlager-dove? >> jeffries. >> kaptur? >> jeffries. >> we just heard two significant votes the. the first is john james, republican from michigan, who yesterday voted for tom cole, not jim jordan. the hope inside the jordan camp that he would change and vote for jim jordan. he did not. he voted for kcandace muller mooex, so a different republican. and then dave joyce, the republican who is prth openly trying to coordinate this notion of giving patrick mchenry the temporary speaker, more power. but in this particular vote, where they are right now, he said he would vote for jim jordan. he cast his vote for jordan. i want to bring in manu raju to talk about what we have seen so far.

what does that tell you as we see this game going on with the votes taken and the conversations behind the scenes? >> reporter: very bad news for jim jordan with congressman james not voting for him. yesterday we had spoken to him and he was open to supporting jordan on the second ballot. that did not happen. he's going in the wrong direction losing two additional republican votes and counting as republicans are starting to grapple about what to do next. i have several conversations in the hall over the last several minutes with some republicans. supporters of jordan say if hen continues to go in wrong direction in of aftermath, they don't think he can continue on with the speakership bud. one said we need to go behind closed doors and have another conference meeting and try to hash out what's going to happen. let's look to see what the final vote is. if it's worse than yesterday, let's figure out a new step. jodi arrington of texas said if

it's going in the wrong direction, we have to figure out what to do. she's been floated among a number of other republicans as a potential speaker candidate himself. i asked if he would consider running for speaker. he didn't want to entertain that question. i want jordan to win. let's see what happens here. if it doesn't happen, then let's talk about it. clearly, leafing the option open. another congressman of wisconsin has been pushed by some republicans to consider a bid for the speakership. i just asked if he would be open to running. he said he's not. he made clear he does not want to run for the speaker of the house. you're getting some a moment just so much confusion, so much division about what the next steps are, even the idea of empowering mchenry has caused such division within the republican conference, meaning democrats would have to support that idea for it to succeed, but other republicans could put

their hat in the ring if jordan guess down. if jordan continues to lose votes, he will lose support from even key backers in the conference who say this cannot continue on. we have to figure out another plan because jordan doesn't have the votes. it's unclear if he ever will at this point. >> it's very unclear. he did just get somebody he didn't get yesterday, the congressman from california voted for jo dance. you're talking about mike lawler of new york. >> lee of florida? >> jordan. >> lee of nevada? >> jeffries. >> lee of pennsylvania? >> jeffries. >> leger fernandez? >> jeffries. >> lesko? >> jordan.

>>low? >> jordan. >> levin? >> jeffries. >> lieu? >> jeffries. >> lofgren? >> jeffries. >> louder milk? >> jordan. >> lucas? >> jordan. >> so as of now, jim jordan has picked up one vote from yesterday. and lost two votes, congressman ferguson and buchanan. so he's still doing worse today than yesterday. nia-malika henderson, none of this is normal. we are in the middle of a

speaker race, it's october. the fact that we haven't had a speaker of the house for tw weeks is not normal the fact that we're having a speaker race when there's not anybody in that room that has 217 votes is not normal. >> this is chaotic. it's dysfunctional for the american people. it's inaction, things need to happen out of this body. it's chaotic world. there are deadlines in terms of funding the government, and there's just no work getting done. things are at a standstill. and this is in some ways a result of a lot of the things that jim jordan has done throughout his tenure in the house. and now we see the chickens coming home to roost for him. sewing discord, sewing d

dysfunction. so today we see him doing worse than yesterday. it isn't likely he's going to start pick ing up anymore votes. i guess he picked up one or two. so i think everyone knew at the be beginning of the day this is how it would go. we knew this last night. there is a lot of distrust towards jim jordan. there's a the lot of anger towards him for the way he's treated fellow members, including scalise in many ways. so you see people are voting for scalise and mccarthy and others because there isn't a lot of good feeling towards jim jordan. we'll see if it this is plan b to empower patrick mexchenry works. >> this statement just came in from former police officer michael finone, who people remember for testimony from 2016

who was wounded during the january 6th attack. just issued a statement saying, jim jordan is an insurrectionist who has no place in being second in line to the presidency. i witnessed the deadly assault with my own eyes, which is why it disgusts me that republicans could choose an insurrectionists as their leader. someone who knew about january 6th ahead of time, yet did nothing to stop it. this is a dark time to our democracy. this should serve as a wakeup call to never take our democracy for granted. that's from a former police officer. >> two things. we really are sort of in silly season with some of this. congressman mike kelly voted for former speaker boehner. >> i'm sorry to interrupt, but congre congresswoman mooeks of iowa

just flipped. so he's lost a net of two. that's a net of two he's lost doing worse today than he did yesterday. sgl two things just to echo what mike said, let's remember what congressman buck said yesterday. there are people who simply can't vote for an election denier. it seems to be common sense, but as we said yesterday, there's very few of them. but there's no question there are new republican who is are emboldened today. it's going in the other direction. i just want to bring up kevin mccarthy one more time. yes, he supported jordan. he endorsed him and told people to vote for him, but i'm going to invoke the i think the

gentleman protest too much. i don't think kevin mccarthy, from when i talked to republican sources, is so sorry to hear this happen to jim jordan. let's remember that kevin mccarthy is still using the speaker's office. his name is still above the door. and if he can't be speaker, i'm not sure he really cared certainly with scalise now. >> he's still using that office space because patrick mchenry is letting him. the point about kevin mccarthy, not only does he have beef with jim jordan, he tried to be speaker in 2015 and that was unsuccessful. jim jordan was part of that effort to keep kevin mccarthy from the speakership.

i wrould just note kevin mccarthy is also on a mission to constantly show, as he says every time in the hallway, that the eight members who ousted him have created this. so while he may not want jordan the job, he's sort of okay with this display of chaos a as a reminder to his fellow republicans about how they got here. >> then there's the question of how you get out of this. given that gang of eight, i think jordan is saying, okay, g guys, i'm going to dare you to have a coalition government and have republicans vote with democrats. >> i was just struck to see, nancy pelosi is sitting right across the aisle from hakeem jeffreys and think just shook hands with each other in a show of solidarity. remember the role they played in housing miguel marquez. they decided not to help him because they want want odd to hold out. it looks like think may be on track to get more out of it. >> the other thing about that that's interesting that i was

struck by nancy pelosi extend a hand of friendship and support to hakeem jeffries is it has been a trope in this town to talk about democrats in disarray. and we noted how much democrats are in array in the last couple weeks. but their generational transfer of power pelosi and hoyer and clyburn to this new generation was seamless, without any at least public dispolice, everything was okay now these guys are going to do their jobs. they all stayed in office, but they are giving up their leadership. and these other three came about. there was very little drama, if any publicly a at least, and that was it. >> that was so important to nancy pelosi. she organized with hoyer.

that was not always a given. and it was flawless. who knows what they did behind the scenes, but it was flawless and this, what we're watching now, the republicans, is as mess. >> listen, the new leadership team on the democratic side looks like america. you have an african-american, a latino, you have a white woman. so you hear sort of the cheers there -- >> i apologize. i want to listen to congressman rutherford from florida. >> roy? >> jordan. >> ruiz? >> jeffries. >> ruppersberger? >> jeffries. >> rutherford? >> scalise. >> so that's 19 no votes for jim

jordan, who is obviously not going to win the speakership on this ballot, unless there's a mad dash to flip votes. >> which there won't be. >> i'm being told to leave that caveat in. but in any case, lauren fox is on capitol hill. i don't know why congressman jordan would ask for a second round of public beatings, but he has done so. what comes after this? >> reporter: yeah, i spoke with jim jordan repeatedly this morning. the last thing that he told reporters is that if he did not succeed on this second ballot, his expectation and his hope, what he asked republican leadership to do, is to try to put forward that resolution to empower patrick mchenry. because it's something that jim jordan is opposed to, but he wants to sort of put the pressure on republican members to decide whether they want to do. now we have heard from repeated

sources that we expect that at some point there will be a resolution introduced to empower the patrick mchenry, and likely it would come after jim jordan had failed to get the speakership. it's really interesting because jim jordan is really trying tos cast this as a clear black and white decision between either giving him the gavel or what he's call ing a coalition government. that is essentially meaning he believes that if republicans join with democrats to empower patrick mchenry, even for a short period of time, that is not what republican voters sent the majority to do. his argument is that that would be a problem. but obviously, he does not have the support. we're going to be watching closely on the floor what happens in the moments after this ballot. but jim jordan told us earlier he wants this resolution to come to the floor. he wants to put republican

members in the position of having to decide whether or not they are supporting a temporary empowerment of patrick mchenry, which he thinks is a coalition government or whether they are going to back him. we should also note if this resolution is introduced, republican leaders have two days, two legislative days to bring it up. it's very unclear what he would do. >> so thank you, lauren. while lauren was giving us the latest, congressman jordan lost another vote. we heard from mike simpson voting for scalise. a lot of scalise allies really upset at the way scalise did not get a fair shake. let's listen for indiana's congresswoman sparks coming up. ed. >> stansberry?

>> jeffries. >> stanton? >> jeffries. >> so in any case, as of right now, jordan has tied his poor performance yesterday and the only thing left to see is if it gets even worse. i believe it will. because i think there's at least two or three noes coming up, if not more. >> i was just going to follow up on what lauren was saying. i think it's so important about when comes next here. and i think the reason jordan is saying let's do that resolution, it's because he wants to test republicans on whether they want to form what he calls a coalition government with the democrats. and see which could put pressure

on republicans to say those moderates perhaps you want to share power. and he is presenting this as power sharing, which it wouldn't be. it would just be a short-term thing where you could get the business of the house done, but i think the choice that he wants to make is do you want to keep it as a republican majority or do you want to lot those democrats have a hand in running the government and running the house even though they didn't win the majority, or would you rather go for a republican speaker. so he's trying to make that choice a little difficult and very stark for members of his own party. >> so congressman pete of minnesota flipped he voted for jordan last time. this time he voted for

so yeah, he's going to do worse this time. the masochism of this is odd. >> yes, i feel like you're harping on this theme, jake. i don't necessarily disagree with you. i think that -- >> scalise did not bring it to the floor for a vote. he was the speaker designate, and he purposely did not bring it to the floor for a vote because he didn't have the votes. i mean, say what you will about steve scalise, and there's plenty to say, he did not subject himself to this public embarrassment. >> yeah. part of me was surprised that scalise didn't try that before he decided that he was going to get out of the race. i think that says a lot more about the differences in character between scalise and jordan. i mean, this is much more of jordan's way, right, to kind of force a showdown, right, and be public about it, be kind of nasty about it behind the

scenes. you know, i think that this really does show you the degree to which your relationships matter in this town. they matter in all of our lives. and at the bottom of it, it's less this way nowadays, much more naturally driven, much more driven from the outside. but there kind of thing is about who your friends are and who they aren't, and jim jordan honestly is reaping what he sowed. in the role that he has played in the conference here. you know, that's not to say -- who knows, maybe he'll keep forcing people to do this over and over and over again, and again another unpredictable outcome will show us he eventually becomes speaker of the house. i think we're sitting here struggling to see what that paths is like right now. >> yeah. and he thought the trump factor would matter. he thought that would put the fear in the hearts of some of these folks who didn't like him, that sean hannity's involvement,

that the grassroots would make these people essentially bow down and support jordan, somebody they didn't really like. that didn't happen. it actually pushed people further away from his column. it made people angry. you had people who actually liked jordan like dan crenshaw saying that kind of tactic, that kind of bullying tactic -- i think he said it to you, jake -- was a stupid idea. so we see the results of it here today. >> i'm reminded of the famous john boehner saying, a leader without followers is just a man out for a walk. >> right. >> i think jordan probably -- you know, he conducted himself for the vast majority of his congressional career as somebody who didn't want to be in the -- to lead the crowd. he wanted to be outside of it. he wanted to cause problems. >> let's listen in because arkansas's steve womack who voted for scalise last time is coming up. and i anticipate he's not going to votes for jim jordan again. and then we're close to the end

anyway. >> whitman. jordan. womack, scalise. yakum, jordan. zinke, jordan. >> okay. so there we go. he was -- lost 20 of his fellow house republicans, congressman jordan, yesterday. and as we did the math, we noted that he lost an additional three today, picked up one. said it was a net loss of two. and indeed you see on the board there scalise got seven, mccarthy got five, others got ten. that's a net loss of 22.

the math checks out. >> it does. >> even though that wasn't my strong suit in high school or college. that's 22 nos, 22 nos, and again, as we anticipated, congressman jim jordan did worse on this ballot. and the desire for why jim jordan called for this vote remains a mystery to me. if he calls for a third ballot, i anticipate he'll do even worse on that one. what's going to happeners david? >> well -- to happen, david? >> well, now, he's crossed the threshold. he has a deeper hole, more nos than kevin mccarthy had in 15 rounds of trying to become and successfully becoming speaker back in january. as you noted, he's going in the wrong direction. it would be hard to imagine he can hope the psychology of the floor is going to somehow change going forward. >> yeah, here are the people who didn't vote before. we're still waiting for victoria spartz. >> jeffries.

[ applause ] s sp spartz, jordan. [ applause ] >> jordan. talieb, jeffries. trone, jeffries. >> okay. so some good news in the loose change there. victoria spartz did flip, but that's 22 votes against jim

jordan from house republicans. not for nothing, look at king -- king jeffries there on the top there with 212 votes, closer -- closer to the speakership than he's ever been. but still close but no cigar. in any case, david, jim jordan farther away from the speakership than he was yesterday. he had 200 votes yesterday. today he has 199, and he had 20 votes against him yesterday. today he has 22 votes against him today. you know, i don't know really what's going on with the house republican caucus, but i feel like i can safely predict that congressman jordan is not on the path to the speakership. >> certainly not on the path, and i'm not one big for predictions, jake, but i would imagine if he were to go to the floor for a third time he would have more no votes come here because a part of what we were talking before, not that goodwill built up in the conference the way frankly kevin

mccarthy had. >> yeah. >> at the beginning, even throw it took him 15 rounds, part of what got him there was that he was largely responsible for getting a lot of those members into their seats over the many years. that's not something -- that's not a chit jim jordan has. i want to note something -- you mentioned congressman jeffries, the 212. total unanimity among the democrats, we were talking about pelosi before, i'm not sure that she would have totaled -- when she became speaker, the last time she became speaker, 15 democratic votes. like she was more of a firefire brand in her own party -- jeffries has not been framed successfully in that way by republicans yet in the electiorates that they thin there's any danger of being unified behind their leader. you were talking about the generation, the torch passing, that's one benefit of the torch passing perhaps. >> one house, one former house republican texted me. there is as bad for matt gaetz as it is for jim jordan.

gaetz would have been celebrated by the base. now the base will turn on him because of the chaos he has created. i don't know. kasie, some -- some in the base, some in the base love chaos. some in the base love chaos. dana bash, i'm going to throw it to you. >> reporter: to say some in the base love chaos may be the understatement of the day, and that says a lot. thank you so much. we have a former member here, charlie dent. and as you watched this, you probably call yourself a former squishy house republican, meaning you are -- >> bedwetter, squish -- >> reporter: pick your term. knowing your former colleagues as you do, what does happen now? >> look, there's -- they're clearly frustrated and angry. i think they're exhausted. they want to move on. so the question is, when does dave joyce or some other member make a motion to empower patrick mchenry. that's the real question. and then do democrats help in

that efforts. i think they're beyond exhausted. some of these no votes are very dug in. steve womack isn't going to change. kay granger's not going to change. ferguson, a -- the former chief deputy whip, he just flipped. i mean, vern buchanan, total team player, he's flipped. i'm not sure -- i don't see a paths for jordan. there's no wisdom to be kicked or the third or the fourth. >> except we talked yesterday that it is his brand to keep fighting. we said that question, whether there would be a second vote. now there was a second vote, and he did worse. he lost net two. yesterday he lost 20. today he lost 22. one of the questions that we have been asking is whether once they gavel this vote, whether david joyce of ohio would try to offer a resolution giving patrick mchenry more powers. my understanding, i'm getting a text, is that that is not going to happe